5 ms·

The weak attempt at justifying this move is telling and makes it very clear that this is political backlash in response to Musk going "off message". I doubt th

The weak attempt at justifying this move is telling and makes it very clear that this is political backlash in response to Musk going "off message". I doubt the intent is to quiet Elon but most likely meant as a warning to other Plutocrats/CEOs to ensure they toe the line and stick to the script.

itsoktocry 4y ago
>makes it very clear that this is political backlash in response to Musk going "off message". The G stands for governance, including: "Governance deals with a company’s leadership, executive pay, audits, internal controls, and shareholder rights"[0]. Do you think Tesla is a model there? [0]https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/environmental-social-and-governance-esg-criteria.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/environmental-social-an...
- bequanna 4y ago
  Ugh, please. There is no consistency in applying the standards that they themselves made up, which should tell you right away what a scam this is. Now they've weaponized it. The people pushing "ESG" anything only care about marketing some product to the virtue signalers. I bet most people who buy this index see "ESG", pat themselves on the back and never even look at the component companies. Check it our for yourself: [0] Apple, Exxon, JPMorgan in the top 10. Still think this is legit? [0] https://cms.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/2022-05-18_09-26-40.jpg?itok=F6lbvUNW https://cms.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/2022-05-18_...
- SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
  I think that sounds like an extraordinarily broad set of criteria, which would make it very easy for ESG index providers to put their thumbs on the scale if they wanted to. In particular it seems impossible to numerically quantify the quality of Tesla's governance vs. that of Ford or General Motors, as S&P is claiming to do here.
  - bequanna 4y ago
    Yep. Membership only seems to require you cooperate with some pedantic, box-checking exercise.
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> this is political backlash in response to Musk going "off message" This is an unfalsifiable claim without citing when Musk made the purported transgression.
- bequanna 4y ago
  Like most things in the real world, there is no smoking gun. It isn't cut and dry. You've got to look at the facts and context and make some judgement call. I don't think it is TOO cynical to assume that often people do things based on some hidden motivation vs. their publicly stated reason. Weigh my opinion however you'd like but the conclusion I made seems to fit quite well.
shapefrog 4y ago
> in response to Musk going "off message" > toe the line and stick to the script What message and what script? The whole purpose of the index is to make money. The movement and everyone in the movement gets paid $$$ if when you plot the ESG index and broad equities the ESG line comes out on top.
MrMan 4y ago
such fantasy bullshit. the "G" in ESG tells you all you need to know. Tesla falls short of governance guidelines which big investors really do care about. A poorly governed company presents investors with more risk and often-times less return than a properly governed one. Bundling the E the S and the G together I think is misguided, but there are lots of services that score companies on the component metrics separately. just look at the Fidelity site / app, they do a very good job of that.

itsoktocry 4y ago

>makes it very clear that this is political backlash in response to Musk going "off message". The G stands for governance, including: "Governance deals with a company’s leadership, executive pay, audits, internal controls, and shareholder rights"[0]. Do you think Tesla is a model there? [0]https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/environmental-social-and-governance-esg-criteria.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/environmental-social-an...

bequanna 4y ago
Ugh, please. There is no consistency in applying the standards that they themselves made up, which should tell you right away what a scam this is. Now they've weaponized it. The people pushing "ESG" anything only care about marketing some product to the virtue signalers. I bet most people who buy this index see "ESG", pat themselves on the back and never even look at the component companies. Check it our for yourself: [0] Apple, Exxon, JPMorgan in the top 10. Still think this is legit? [0] https://cms.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/2022-05-18_09-26-40.jpg?itok=F6lbvUNW https://cms.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/2022-05-18_...
SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
I think that sounds like an extraordinarily broad set of criteria, which would make it very easy for ESG index providers to put their thumbs on the scale if they wanted to. In particular it seems impossible to numerically quantify the quality of Tesla's governance vs. that of Ford or General Motors, as S&P is claiming to do here.
- bequanna 4y ago
  Yep. Membership only seems to require you cooperate with some pedantic, box-checking exercise.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> this is political backlash in response to Musk going "off message" This is an unfalsifiable claim without citing when Musk made the purported transgression.

bequanna 4y ago
Like most things in the real world, there is no smoking gun. It isn't cut and dry. You've got to look at the facts and context and make some judgement call. I don't think it is TOO cynical to assume that often people do things based on some hidden motivation vs. their publicly stated reason. Weigh my opinion however you'd like but the conclusion I made seems to fit quite well.

shapefrog 4y ago

> in response to Musk going "off message" > toe the line and stick to the script What message and what script? The whole purpose of the index is to make money. The movement and everyone in the movement gets paid $$$ if when you plot the ESG index and broad equities the ESG line comes out on top.

MrMan 4y ago

such fantasy bullshit. the "G" in ESG tells you all you need to know. Tesla falls short of governance guidelines which big investors really do care about. A poorly governed company presents investors with more risk and often-times less return than a properly governed one. Bundling the E the S and the G together I think is misguided, but there are lots of services that score companies on the component metrics separately. just look at the Fidelity site / app, they do a very good job of that.